Want to know why Apple is picking on Samsung in court?

Apple has taken many of the world's top handset manufacturers to court. Motorola and HTC are two that come to mind. But when you think about Apple's Army of attorneys battling a defendant in court, your mind automatically goes to Samsung. It is Samsung that Apple claims "slavishly" copied the design of its Apple iPhone and Apple iPad with the Samsung Galaxy line. It is Samsung that Apple claims "unjustly enriched" itself to the tune of $2.525 billion. And of course, it is the Samsung Galaxy S III that has sold 10 million units in a heartbeat, getting Apple worked up about their smartphone losing its position as the most coveted handset in the world.

The 'visual graph', from a tweet sent by All Things D's John Paczkowski, shows the reasoning behind Apple's laser like focus on Samsung. Just looking at the images would probably have you believe that Samsung was guilty of copying Apple's design. But you would need to know the whole story. The first touchscreen handset from Samsung's camp was the F700. Despite the uncanny resemblance to the Apple iPhone, the Samsung F700 featured a side-sliding QWERTY keyboard unlike Apple's handset. More importantly, the F700 was introduced just one month after the Apple iPhone. Some feel this is too close to the announcement of Apple's device for the Korean based manufacturer to have taken its cue from the iPhone.

Of course, the Samsung F700 isn't the issue of the current Apple-Samsung patent war, but we wouldn't be surprised if in Apple's mind, it is the first example of Samsung copying the look and feel of the Apple iPhone.

sorcio46, that is a REALLY, REALLY DUMB comment. It is a KNOWN fact that Apple works on both the hardware and software. Apple has been working on both the hardware and software since 1984 when it first introduced the MacIntosh. It is also a KNOWN fact that Apple was working on the iPhone due to information on iTunes.

Next is the issue of mobile OS. It is also a known fact that LG cannot write software as well as Apple. To say Apple copied the Prada, it must also mean Apple copied the OS and that is completely bull-manure!!

BTW, to show a picture of keypads versus a bona fide full blown mobile OS is really DUMB.

Most android users, who claim they are knowlegeable about technology, will concede the point that Apple CANNOT copy LG because a mobile device needs a mobile OS. Apple invented a lot of that technology and have received patents for it, thus reaffirming it could not have copied because the technology did not exists.

Hey Mr. Fact Checker, the LG Prada won the iF Design Award in September 2006. The submission for that award is when the Prada was first unveiled. It was announced on December 12, 2006. Apple having an "idea" about an iPhone has nothing to do with its design.

I can agree with you if in steve jobs biography there are specific blue prints to the making of the iphone and those blueprints were made and thought of well before the Lg prada was invented...Other than that i cant say much.

"To say Apple copied the Prada, it must also mean Apple copied the OS and that is completely bull-manure!!"

Is it something mind blowing to know that you CAN indeed make a phone with the exact same "exterior" look as another but have a different operating system beneath?? wow dude apple could have copied the Lg prada inch by inch and still kept the Iphone operating system...that is nothing hard to grasp there.

" wow dude apple could have copied the Lg prada inch by inch and still kept the Iphone operating system"

Spoken by someone who never designed an mobile OS that sold in the millions.

Apple has been integrating hardware and software since 1984 since that was Steve Jobs' mission. To take the argument Apple copied prada's shell while ignoring the software is bull-manure when it comes to Apple products.

Ardent, you just hit a perfect 10 on the fanboy scale. Your logic here seems to suggest that since Apple has been a hardware and software company since 1984, that it's impossible for them to be inspired by any other outside influences. That makes no sense at all.

Steve Jobs even admitts he stole ideas, so it's not much of a stretch to believe that the original design of the iPhone wasn't what he imagined, he saw the LG Prada, he redesign the iPhone using design cues from the Prada either intentionally or unintentionally.

Was that the best you could do? "Dumb category"? Anyway... The idea and development and design of a phone are very different things. Just because they had the idea to make a phone doesn't mean they had the design. And what does their method of "concurrent development" have to do with anything? Designs are often changed during the developmental stages, so developing multiple devices at once has nothing to do with design, but nice try. The Prada image was out there before the iPhone, that's a fact. Which means there is the possibility that Apple stole their design.

The LG Prada was introduce to the media in Jan 07', but there were known images of it in Dec 06'. Which as crossblade points out isn't very long, but surely is enough time for a tech giant like Apple to create a working prototype. Especially since almost everything is done in-house.

I dunno, that's a bit of a stretch to get a working and smooth prototype with all the in-house apps they showed. I have no doubt they may have had a little influence from the Prada, but to completely base their phone off it? They didnt have enough time to do this, short of Apple having infiltrated LG in the very, very early stages of the development of that phone.

I am not even going to touch this. At this point this is all trivial. How can Apple prove this, how can Apple say they lost market share.? I am telling you, this kinda stuff only happens in............. The Twilight Zone! lol

phone arena picked the windows mobile devices as the "before"... that didnt include TOUCHWIZ, which included touchwiz was the Samsung Finesse as an example which has the same user interface we relatively experience today, just with icons instead of words...

Growing their user base is the real challenge for Apple. To maintain their recent growth rates requires non-trivial sales to new customers. Sammy presents a viable alternative to what Apple is offering. If LG were posting the sales numbers that Sammy is putting up, they probably would be in court as well.

Apple is offering what is in many respects, a dated product (especially compared to JB). Litigation is Apple's attempt to slow the market erosion in the absence of innovation.

Apart from the glass (which was a stupid, stupid move) the giant antenna (which caused issues they never fixed) and having a worthwhile antenna, what was majorly different about the iPhone 4?

Every iteration of major Android handset lines, on the other hand, have had major enough physical changes that they're easily distinguishable from their predecessors. Also, Android has continued to morph software wise, and while it retains the elements which make it easily recognizable, is very different now from what it was.

Apple's UI works (although I find the light blue/gray to be hideous and boring in their lists and menus, and the lack of options to be annoying) but Apple hasn't come out with anything boat rocking since the original iPhone.

it was a stupid move, my friend had an ipod touch 4th gen (same screen as an iphone 4/4s) and dropped it and the front was all shattered, but if i were to drop my lg optimus black or a samsung galaxy s2, the video proves the difference between glass on the iphone and gorilla glass for android devices and this is with gorilla glass 1, not the new and improved gorilla glass 2.

I honestly feel like some of you Android people really shouldn't be combining (especially the Samsung users). Many people/reviewers across the Internet called the SGIII's design as ugly and uninspiring. And despite the advances in the polycarbonate material, it still has the plasticy feel.

I was really discontent with Apple's decision to keep the design the same, but some of you should not be complaining about design.

SleepingOz, the flaw in your argument is that the iPad patent filing was 3/17/2004 -- iPad was publicly released at a later time. In fact, if you look at the drawings (Figure 9), it's clear Apple's iPad design predates Samsung's products.

yeah ok, i'll agree that the samsung Galaxy range LOOKS rather like the iphone range but as sorcio46 says, you dont see car manufactures sue their rivals because one car looks like the next. i hope samsung sues apple when the iphone5 comes out for it looking much like the 4inch phones that samsung do.

In 2003 Jeep sued GM over the seven slot grill. Yes car lawsuits are fewer and far between but they do happen.

Now as for the Apple/Samsung battle, its getting out of hand. Apple can say what they want but in the end they are realizing their growth will slow because of devices like GNexus, GS3, and GNote.

I have owned both iPhones, SGS2 and now Note. Things that pushed me back to GNote is the OS limitations with Apple. The inability to download from the web and have call block apps is a big limitations.

all produced before the iphone so did apple take designs like this and refine them? Sorry apple but touch screen smart phones as they are now are a natural evoltion of cell phones get over it your not god your a bunch of whiney little bitches. You cant compete so you sue.

38.Aeires (unregistered)

I hope you're not saying Apple invented capacitive touch screens? Capacitive touch screens were just starting to be released, so it's no wonder phones around that time period weren't using them yet, too new of technology. Lucky for Apple, they did use them, but if the iPhone had been a year earlier, it too wouldn't have had them.

It's not just capactive touch screens -- it's the ability to use multi-touch such as, but not limited to: (a) double tap, (b) pinch to zoom, (c) slide to unlock, (d) swipes, all on a large 3.5" screen (for that time period) on Gorilla Glass without the need for a stylus or physical qwerty keyboard.

@ardent1...The "design" of the phones is Apples main argument, not the technology. They want $24 for each Samsung unit that copied Apple's "design", which they obviously and blatantly copied from other manufacturers, including Samsung. Apple's hypocritical attitude and sue happy practices over things that they blatantly copied from someone else are the dominant reason why I will never own an apple product.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

All content (phone reviews, news, specs, info), design and layouts are Copyright 2001-2015 phoneArena.com. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part or in any form or medium without written permission is prohibited! Privacy . Terms of use . Cookies . Team